Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'

[jdinasia]

2/3 of the country arnt just going to disappear, they will adapt and wait.

2/3???

[norstatin]

2/3 of the country arnt just going to disappear, they will adapt and wait.

2/3???

It's an unsupported pie-in-the-sky claim from someone not here.

[rubl]

So, no co-operation from red-shirts, none from some foreign posters. The reason, why that should be clear 'history teaches us'. Maybe the other history lesson is on polarising a situation to the point where chaos and violence is unavoidable with of course the others to be blamed. Not the fault of the red-shirts, they didn't do anything, just sit still and suffer in dignity or so. Still peeved off because their refusal to cooperate was taken so literal as to them not even having been forcibly appointed.

Yeah, a lot of people like to minimize their 'cooperation' with military dictatorships. I wonder why that is.

Regarding the redshirts being 'peeved', the title of the OP is "Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'". Not quite the same as peeved.

The red shirts seem to think "if not my way then no way' and their way was that as defined by that democratic figure called Thaksin.

Any way, we have Jatuporn stating to be not surprised with no red-shirts or Pheu Thai party members in the NRC committees as his group had refused to join. Seem it now is 'Jatuporn thinks, Pheu Thai acts'.

Since the UDD leaders are so clear in their indifference, pessimism and contempt and with Dr. weng stating 'what's the point' it would seem they are somewhat peeved at not being able to steer and guide as they like to do. As far as I know they didn't even offer the 'red-shirt school for democracy' curriculum as input.

You seem sure that you know what the UDD was thinking. Were you sitting in on some UDD meetings, or are you speculating?

I read the OP, which helps a lot when responding to it. Also I quoted from it and replied with "it would seem".

So, I seem to think with you seem to interpret as I state continuing with asking a question based on what you think I stated.

Now of course if you have proof that Dr. weng, Ms Thida or any other ranking figure in the UDD suggested the NRC committee on education should have a look at their curriculum for 'democracy for red-shirt adults' please share with us. I for one am ready to denounce the NRC committee for such deed.

[rubl]

Yeah, a lot of people like to minimize their 'cooperation' with military dictatorships. I wonder why that is.

Regarding the redshirts being 'peeved', the title of the OP is "Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'". Not quite the same as peeved.

for one, from the UDD perspective, the 'NCPO' has no legitimacy to govern, much less institute reforms. Not supporting that or participating is a typical response.

For another, let's say the UDD had thrown themselves into the selection ring - presumably to influence the result of the NRC reforms. The foregone conclusion is that their influence would be zero - the 'NCPO' and not the NRC is calling the shots, and yet their participation would support the 'NCPO' and their illusion that the NRC was somehow legitimate.

If your stand is against 'interventions', then you don't break bread with them.

A typical response indeed, especially with your 'foregone conclusion is that their influence would be zero'.

Now one may wonder what the meaning was of the 'democratic' reconciliation the Yingluck government had in mind with their blanket amnesty bill. Getting 100,000 people marching in Bangkok in a show of support? Or having Pheu Thai party list MPs and UDD leaders mobilise the 'forces of democracy' to show those anti-government protesters what would be good for them?

Those cowards attacking in the night indeed didn't feel like breaking bread, or reconciliation, intimidation and murder, UDD style. With Ms. Yingluck asking ALL sides to refrain from what one side only did.

To heck with the topic, let's talk about the amnesty attempt. That's what rubl wants to discuss.

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

[fab4]

for one, from the UDD perspective, the 'NCPO' has no legitimacy to govern, much less institute reforms. Not supporting that or participating is a typical response.

For another, let's say the UDD had thrown themselves into the selection ring - presumably to influence the result of the NRC reforms. The foregone conclusion is that their influence would be zero - the 'NCPO' and not the NRC is calling the shots, and yet their participation would support the 'NCPO' and their illusion that the NRC was somehow legitimate.

If your stand is against 'interventions', then you don't break bread with them.

A typical response indeed, especially with your 'foregone conclusion is that their influence would be zero'.

Now one may wonder what the meaning was of the 'democratic' reconciliation the Yingluck government had in mind with their blanket amnesty bill. Getting 100,000 people marching in Bangkok in a show of support? Or having Pheu Thai party list MPs and UDD leaders mobilise the 'forces of democracy' to show those anti-government protesters what would be good for them?

Those cowards attacking in the night indeed didn't feel like breaking bread, or reconciliation, intimidation and murder, UDD style. With Ms. Yingluck asking ALL sides to refrain from what one side only did.

To heck with the topic, let's talk about the amnesty attempt. That's what rubl wants to discuss.

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

Shakes head in amazement - you don't even know you're doing it, do you?

[tbthailand]

Yeah, a lot of people like to minimize their 'cooperation' with military dictatorships. I wonder why that is.

Regarding the redshirts being 'peeved', the title of the OP is "Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'". Not quite the same as peeved.

for one, from the UDD perspective, the 'NCPO' has no legitimacy to govern, much less institute reforms. Not supporting that or participating is a typical response.

For another, let's say the UDD had thrown themselves into the selection ring - presumably to influence the result of the NRC reforms. The foregone conclusion is that their influence would be zero - the 'NCPO' and not the NRC is calling the shots, and yet their participation would support the 'NCPO' and their illusion that the NRC was somehow legitimate.

If your stand is against 'interventions', then you don't break bread with them.

A typical response indeed, especially with your 'foregone conclusion is that their influence would be zero'.

Now one may wonder what the meaning was of the 'democratic' reconciliation the Yingluck government had in mind with their blanket amnesty bill. Getting 100,000 people marching in Bangkok in a show of support? Or having Pheu Thai party list MPs and UDD leaders mobilise the 'forces of democracy' to show those anti-government protesters what would be good for them?

Those cowards attacking in the night indeed didn't feel like breaking bread, or reconciliation, intimidation and murder, UDD style. With Ms. Yingluck asking ALL sides to refrain from what one side only did.

Edited October 8, 2014 by tbthailand

[rubl]

To heck with the topic, let's talk about the amnesty attempt. That's what rubl wants to discuss.

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

Shakes head in amazement - you don't even know you're doing it, do you?

Which part in "You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill." didn't you understand ?

[englishoak]

2/3 of the country arnt just going to disappear, they will adapt and wait.

2/3???

It's an unsupported pie-in-the-sky claim from someone not here.

2/3 isnt democrats now is it ? use your noddles theres more than just ptp and democrats to vote for.

[fab4]

To heck with the topic, let's talk about the amnesty attempt. That's what rubl wants to discuss.

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

Shakes head in amazement - you don't even know you're doing it, do you?

Which part in "You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill." didn't you understand ?

You see what I don't understand, rubl, is you stating that heybruce is lying when he said that you wanted to discuss the "amnesty attempt" rather than the thread topic and then you immediately follow that denial with more statements about the "amnesty attempt", to wit,

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate.............................. blah, blah, blah

That's what I don't understand.

Edited October 8, 2014 by fab4

[heybruce]

Yeah, a lot of people like to minimize their 'cooperation' with military dictatorships. I wonder why that is.

Regarding the redshirts being 'peeved', the title of the OP is "Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'". Not quite the same as peeved.

The red shirts seem to think "if not my way then no way' and their way was that as defined by that democratic figure called Thaksin.

Any way, we have Jatuporn stating to be not surprised with no red-shirts or Pheu Thai party members in the NRC committees as his group had refused to join. Seem it now is 'Jatuporn thinks, Pheu Thai acts'.

Since the UDD leaders are so clear in their indifference, pessimism and contempt and with Dr. weng stating 'what's the point' it would seem they are somewhat peeved at not being able to steer and guide as they like to do. As far as I know they didn't even offer the 'red-shirt school for democracy' curriculum as input.

You seem sure that you know what the UDD was thinking. Were you sitting in on some UDD meetings, or are you speculating?

I read the OP, which helps a lot when responding to it. Also I quoted from it and replied with "it would seem".

So, I seem to think with you seem to interpret as I state continuing with asking a question based on what you think I stated.

Now of course if you have proof that Dr. weng, Ms Thida or any other ranking figure in the UDD suggested the NRC committee on education should have a look at their curriculum for 'democracy for red-shirt adults' please share with us. I for one am ready to denounce the NRC committee for such deed.

Ah, "it would seem"! You can post anything you want with an "it would seem" post, and then challenge others to prove you wrong.

Have fun with that, most of us will ignore it, and resist the temptation to post "it would seem" thoughts about you. Though it would seem you are an apologetic, rationalizing lapdog to an illegal, undemocratic, rule-by-decree.....No, no, I won't go there.

[heybruce]

for one, from the UDD perspective, the 'NCPO' has no legitimacy to govern, much less institute reforms. Not supporting that or participating is a typical response.

For another, let's say the UDD had thrown themselves into the selection ring - presumably to influence the result of the NRC reforms. The foregone conclusion is that their influence would be zero - the 'NCPO' and not the NRC is calling the shots, and yet their participation would support the 'NCPO' and their illusion that the NRC was somehow legitimate.

If your stand is against 'interventions', then you don't break bread with them.

A typical response indeed, especially with your 'foregone conclusion is that their influence would be zero'.

Now one may wonder what the meaning was of the 'democratic' reconciliation the Yingluck government had in mind with their blanket amnesty bill. Getting 100,000 people marching in Bangkok in a show of support? Or having Pheu Thai party list MPs and UDD leaders mobilise the 'forces of democracy' to show those anti-government protesters what would be good for them?

Those cowards attacking in the night indeed didn't feel like breaking bread, or reconciliation, intimidation and murder, UDD style. With Ms. Yingluck asking ALL sides to refrain from what one side only did.

To heck with the topic, let's talk about the amnesty attempt. That's what rubl wants to discuss.

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

You call it a lie then prove me right. Has anyone brought up the amnesty bill on this topic other than you? Does the fact that you've been challenged on the amnesty bill on other threads have anything to do with this thread?

Focus ruble, focus. The title of this topic is:

"Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'"

Many 'red shirts' don't wish to participate in the military junta that followed the coup that toppled a democratically elected government they supported. Any on-topic comments that don't involve the amnesty bill?

[jdinasia]

2/3 of the country arnt just going to disappear, they will adapt and wait.

2/3???

It's an unsupported pie-in-the-sky claim from someone not here.

2/3 isnt democrats now is it ? use your noddles theres more than just ptp and democrats to vote for.

Huh? Nobody suggested that

...

Only lie on the table is the 2/3 by EO

[jdinasia]

2/3 of the country arnt just going to disappear, they will adapt and wait.

2/3???

It's an unsupported pie-in-the-sky claim from someone not here.

2/3 isnt democrats now is it ? use your noddles theres more than just ptp and democrats to vote for.

Exactly..

Yet for leadership democratically there are currently just 2 choices.

The final 1/3 is fractured.

Your post seemed to suggest PTP was 2/3.

Edited October 9, 2014 by jdinasia

[Robby nz]

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

You call it a lie then prove me right. Has anyone brought up the amnesty bill on this topic other than you? Does the fact that you've been challenged on the amnesty bill on other threads have anything to do with this thread?

Focus ruble, focus. The title of this topic is:

"Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'"

Many 'red shirts' don't wish to participate in the military junta that followed the coup that toppled a democratically elected government they supported. Any on-topic comments that don't involve the amnesty bill?

There was no elected Govt in place when the military took over. Only 26 appointed acting cabinet ministers every last one appointed by the convicted criminal on the run.

Not a single one of the 26 had ever faced the people at a ballot box so none were elected and to call them a Govt is stretching reality far beyond the limits.

The red shirts and PT refuse to take part because Thaksin tells them not to, he still gives the orders, and does it quite openly.

Thaksin orders Pheu Thai, red-shirt leaders to forgive and forget: report

August 17, 2014 9:55 am

BANGKOK: -- Overjoyed with news that he is about to have twin granddaughters, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra has ordered leaders of the Pheu Thai Party and the red-shirt movement to withdraw all legal lawsuits against their political opponents, Thairath TV reported.

It quoted a Pheu Thai source as saying that Thaksin wanted the Pheu Thai and red-shirt leaders to forgive and forget and end the conflicts during the tenure of the junta.

Source: http://www.nationmul...g-30241101.html

It is not only their loss that they don't take part and have input but the loss of those who they say they represent.

If they truly represented the people then they would want to be in there suggesting reforms that would benefit those people, such as badly needed education reforms.

Those in the north and northeast who voted for PT are being largely left out of any reform process because the people they voted into parliament have refused to represent them in the reform process, that these people are no longer MP's since the house was dissolved makes no difference they should still be willing to represent the people who had faith in them.

The PT ex MP's should have been canvassing their people and putting together their own reform wants ready to present to the NRC even if the dont actively take part.

Yes the Dems have said they have proposals ready to table for the NRC.

[rubl]

Shakes head in amazement - you don't even know you're doing it, do you?

Which part in "You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill." didn't you understand ?

You see what I don't understand, rubl, is you stating that heybruce is lying when he said that you wanted to discuss the "amnesty attempt" rather than the thread topic and then you immediately follow that denial with more statements about the "amnesty attempt", to wit,

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate.............................. blah, blah, blah

That's what I don't understand.

I don't want to discuss the off topic blanket amnesty bill. Its just that some posters keep including the "dropped" or "dead" bill in their post. Then I feel a need to correct their incorrect assumption. I even go out of my way to make sure we're talking about the same bill when referring to the 'blanket amnesty bill' as there were five or six other but similar bills which indeed were dropped.

Hope you now understand, as I would rather like to stop repeating myself over and over again as other posters persist in being obdurate.

[englishoak]

It's an unsupported pie-in-the-sky claim from someone not here.

2/3 isnt democrats now is it ? use your noddles theres more than just ptp and democrats to vote for.

Exactly..

Yet for leadership democratically there are currently just 2 choices.

The final 1/3 is fractured.

Your post seemed to suggest PTP was 2/3.

Well im perfectly used to idiots assuming if you dont support one main camp you have to be supporting the other main one so nothing new.

The final third as you put it is the wild card, dont discount it, it might nor be a majority winner but it sure can be and is used to form coalitions. That third is hugely important tbh.

K ill say this yet again, im not red and im not yellow but you really do have to get out of your heads that democrats and PTP were 1/3 each. the Dems have NEVER been close in the last decade or more of elections, let alone neck and neck...thats just fact and no point trying to spin it.

Now i dont really give a crap about either of the main parties but as far as popularity is concerned i will say this because its true, They dont have anything like the support they would love to claim. End of story.Even Korn and Marky boy accept that it would be smart to not argue the point.

The Democrats or PAD whatever have always lived in a dreamworld and place of BS and lies when it comes to support... borne out every single election and the poor support on the day. What they cant win in elections they get by force through supported military coups over the bodies of their own countrymen...

I dont support either and what they have shown to be capable of and have done to their own Thai people is disgusting, tbh they both make me sick

I look forward to their corrupt, lying sycophantic conspiring demise along with their main opponents PTP

And no im not a fan of coups as an alternative to elections.

Hope that clears up my political position for you ...

Edited October 9, 2014 by englishoak

[Robby nz]

The Democrats or PAD whatever have always lived in a dreamworld and place of BS and lies when it comes to support... borne out every single election and the poor support on the day. What they cant win in elections they get by force through supported military coups over the bodies of their own countrymen...

Yes that makes your position very clear you are a red supporter.

But we knew that from your many previous posts.

[jdinasia]

It's an unsupported pie-in-the-sky claim from someone not here.

2/3 isnt democrats now is it ? use your noddles theres more than just ptp and democrats to vote for.

Exactly..

Yet for leadership democratically there are currently just 2 choices.

The final 1/3 is fractured.

Your post seemed to suggest PTP was 2/3.

Well im perfectly used to idiots assuming if you dont support one main camp you have to be supporting the other main one so nothing new.

The final third as you put it is the wild card, dont discount it, it might nor be a majority winner but it sure can be and is used to form coalitions. That third is hugely important tbh.

K ill say this yet again, im not red and im not yellow but you really do have to get out of your heads that democrats and PTP were 1/3 each. the Dems have NEVER been close in the last decade or more of elections, let alone neck and neck...thats just fact and no point trying to spin it.

Now i dont really give a crap about either of the main parties but as far as popularity is concerned i will say this because its true, They dont have anything like the support they would love to claim. End of story.Even Korn and Marky boy accept that it would be smart to not argue the point.

The Democrats or PAD whatever have always lived in a dreamworld and place of BS and lies when it comes to support... borne out every single election and the poor support on the day. What they cant win in elections they get by force through supported military coups over the bodies of their own countrymen...

I dont support either and what they have shown to be capable of and have done to their own Thai people is disgusting, tbh they both make me sick

I look forward to their corrupt, lying sycophantic conspiring demise along with their main opponents PTP

And no im not a fan of coups as an alternative to elections.

Hope that clears up my political position for you ...

I suggest you look at the raw data on the 07 and 11 elections..

Your first paragraph asserts something I didn't say.. You flew from there.

[englishoak]

2/3 isnt democrats now is it ? use your noddles theres more than just ptp and democrats to vote for.

Exactly..

Yet for leadership democratically there are currently just 2 choices.

The final 1/3 is fractured.

Your post seemed to suggest PTP was 2/3.

Well im perfectly used to idiots assuming if you dont support one main camp you have to be supporting the other main one so nothing new.

The final third as you put it is the wild card, dont discount it, it might nor be a majority winner but it sure can be and is used to form coalitions. That third is hugely important tbh.

K ill say this yet again, im not red and im not yellow but you really do have to get out of your heads that democrats and PTP were 1/3 each. the Dems have NEVER been close in the last decade or more of elections, let alone neck and neck...thats just fact and no point trying to spin it.

Now i dont really give a crap about either of the main parties but as far as popularity is concerned i will say this because its true, They dont have anything like the support they would love to claim. End of story.Even Korn and Marky boy accept that it would be smart to not argue the point.

The Democrats or PAD whatever have always lived in a dreamworld and place of BS and lies when it comes to support... borne out every single election and the poor support on the day. What they cant win in elections they get by force through supported military coups over the bodies of their own countrymen...

I dont support either and what they have shown to be capable of and have done to their own Thai people is disgusting, tbh they both make me sick

I look forward to their corrupt, lying sycophantic conspiring demise along with their main opponents PTP

And no im not a fan of coups as an alternative to elections.

Hope that clears up my political position for you ...

I suggest you look at the raw data on the 07 and 11 elections..

Your first paragraph asserts something I didn't say.. You flew from there.

I wasnt suggesting it was anything you said np

Being blunt dosnt mean im not telling the truth. this fallacy which claims the democrats run or ever ran a close race is total Thai BS , they dont,

The democrats whatever youd prefer were NOT as popular as their main opponents by a huge margin and never have been. Going from a whitewash win to huge to slightly less than huge after a coup,isnt proving much,,

Its called becoming disenfranchised and thats what the people are in general here, which is im sure what some of the upper echelons would prefer, then all those pesky farmers wouldnt be such an inconvenient obstacle. People also figure if they do choose and the powers that have the biggest pockets/guns dont like the result they will do what they want anyway,like the airport shutdown or the last two coups..and they would be right too, great way to engage the people in politics i must say.

Cant stand bad losers and Thais, especially those who think breeding/money ranks by importance are the worst losers I know. They do sit in both main camps of course these stuck up hiso or wannabe hiso fools but it is sooo much more pronounced in the yellows. That however dosnt make me a supporter of PTP...

To get back on topic yes standing back and watching the train wreck happening in slow motion atm and as it will continue to in as time goes on is by far the best thing to do.

K rant over

Edited October 9, 2014 by englishoak

[jdinasia]

Feel free to look at those numbers... Then get back to me. Raw numbers.. Actual votes cast.

[heybruce]

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

You call it a lie then prove me right. Has anyone brought up the amnesty bill on this topic other than you? Does the fact that you've been challenged on the amnesty bill on other threads have anything to do with this thread?

Focus ruble, focus. The title of this topic is:

"Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'"

Many 'red shirts' don't wish to participate in the military junta that followed the coup that toppled a democratically elected government they supported. Any on-topic comments that don't involve the amnesty bill?

There was no elected Govt in place when the military took over. Only 26 appointed acting cabinet ministers every last one appointed by the convicted criminal on the run.

Not a single one of the 26 had ever faced the people at a ballot box so none were elected and to call them a Govt is stretching reality far beyond the limits.

The red shirts and PT refuse to take part because Thaksin tells them not to, he still gives the orders, and does it quite openly.

Thaksin orders Pheu Thai, red-shirt leaders to forgive and forget: report

August 17, 2014 9:55 am

BANGKOK: -- Overjoyed with news that he is about to have twin granddaughters, former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra has ordered leaders of the Pheu Thai Party and the red-shirt movement to withdraw all legal lawsuits against their political opponents, Thairath TV reported.

It quoted a Pheu Thai source as saying that Thaksin wanted the Pheu Thai and red-shirt leaders to forgive and forget and end the conflicts during the tenure of the junta.

Source: http://www.nationmul...g-30241101.html

It is not only their loss that they don't take part and have input but the loss of those who they say they represent.

If they truly represented the people then they would want to be in there suggesting reforms that would benefit those people, such as badly needed education reforms.

Those in the north and northeast who voted for PT are being largely left out of any reform process because the people they voted into parliament have refused to represent them in the reform process, that these people are no longer MP's since the house was dissolved makes no difference they should still be willing to represent the people who had faith in them.

The PT ex MP's should have been canvassing their people and putting together their own reform wants ready to present to the NRC even if the dont actively take part.

Yes the Dems have said they have proposals ready to table for the NRC.

The PTP, the party that won the election in 2011, was still governing the nation when the coup was staged. You can split hairs as to whether this qualified as an elected government at the time, but the point is that the redshirts saw their party removed from government by the coup and now clearly don't want to have anything to do with the junta.

Regarding your Thaksin news article; I don't know how many people still pay attention to him, and neither do you. However that article would seem to give his blessings to redshirt participation on the NRC.

Finally, on the subject of reforms in general, and education reforms in particular, the NCPO will decide which reforms will be enacted, and Prayuth seems to have a less than liberal attitude towards education: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/03/junta-suppression-academic-talk-democracy-exposes-cracks-in-thailand-peaceful/

Edited October 9, 2014 by heybruce

[rubl]

The red shirts seem to think "if not my way then no way' and their way was that as defined by that democratic figure called Thaksin.

Any way, we have Jatuporn stating to be not surprised with no red-shirts or Pheu Thai party members in the NRC committees as his group had refused to join. Seem it now is 'Jatuporn thinks, Pheu Thai acts'.

Since the UDD leaders are so clear in their indifference, pessimism and contempt and with Dr. weng stating 'what's the point' it would seem they are somewhat peeved at not being able to steer and guide as they like to do. As far as I know they didn't even offer the 'red-shirt school for democracy' curriculum as input.

You seem sure that you know what the UDD was thinking. Were you sitting in on some UDD meetings, or are you speculating?

I read the OP, which helps a lot when responding to it. Also I quoted from it and replied with "it would seem".

So, I seem to think with you seem to interpret as I state continuing with asking a question based on what you think I stated.

Now of course if you have proof that Dr. weng, Ms Thida or any other ranking figure in the UDD suggested the NRC committee on education should have a look at their curriculum for 'democracy for red-shirt adults' please share with us. I for one am ready to denounce the NRC committee for such deed.

Ah, "it would seem"! You can post anything you want with an "it would seem" post, and then challenge others to prove you wrong.

Have fun with that, most of us will ignore it, and resist the temptation to post "it would seem" thoughts about you. Though it would seem you are an apologetic, rationalizing lapdog to an illegal, undemocratic, rule-by-decree.....No, no, I won't go there.

Opinion is all about 'it would seem'. Of course if you think I should ignore opinions ...

BTW I don't challenge on my 'it would seem', I just point out that the interpretation of my opinion is incorrect. Furthermore you ask me how come I 'seem' to know what the UDD thinks and upon pointing out the OP as source, I just ask if you know more than that as you challenge me.

All in good (non alcoholic) spirits, in the privacy of my room, happily waving a hand with one of the digits stretched. May I challenge you to guess which one, my dear non-apologetic, non-rational believer in and of all that is not related to your version of democracy. At least that 'seems' to be your attitude.

[rubl]

To heck with the topic, let's talk about the amnesty attempt. That's what rubl wants to discuss.

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

You call it a lie then prove me right. Has anyone brought up the amnesty bill on this topic other than you? Does the fact that you've been challenged on the amnesty bill on other threads have anything to do with this thread?

Focus ruble, focus. The title of this topic is:

"Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'"

Many 'red shirts' don't wish to participate in the military junta that followed the coup that toppled a democratically elected government they supported. Any on-topic comments that don't involve the amnesty bill?

Interestingly the OP does only mention "key red-shirts", like Dr. weng and Jatuporn.

"Red-shirt United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) co-leader Weng Tojirakarn said the whole process was under the junta's dictates, so it was pointless."

"Red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan said he was not surprised that neither red-shirt supporters nor members of Pheu Thai Party were appointed NRC members because his group had refused to join in the first place."

Somehow that gives the democratic impression that the red-shirt leadership has told their flock to sit tight and don't move. Probably because they should wait till the NCPO/NLA steps down before starting their games again?

[rubl]

The PTP, the party that won the election in 2011, was still governing the nation when the coup was staged. You can split hairs as to whether this qualified as an elected government at the time, but the point is that the redshirts saw their party removed from government by the coup and now clearly don't want to have anything to do with the junta.

Regarding your Thaksin news article; I don't know how many people still pay attention to him, and neither do you. However that article would seem to give his blessings to redshirt participation on the NRC.

Finally, on the subject of reforms in general, and education reforms in particular, the NCPO will decide which reforms will be enacted, and Prayuth seems to have a less than liberal attitude towards education: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/03/junta-suppression-academic-talk-democracy-exposes-cracks-in-thailand-peaceful/

Actually if someone was 'governing' it would have been the 'unclear status' decimated cabinet and not the Pheu Thai party, or any other party in the nominally coalition government before the House was dissolved.

As for Thaksin, completely agree. Even Jatuporn now talks for Pheu Thai according to the OP.

BTW you used 'seems' in your last sentence. Didn't you just tell my I should not do that ?

Edited October 10, 2014 by rubl

[heybruce]

You seem sure that you know what the UDD was thinking. Were you sitting in on some UDD meetings, or are you speculating?

I read the OP, which helps a lot when responding to it. Also I quoted from it and replied with "it would seem".

So, I seem to think with you seem to interpret as I state continuing with asking a question based on what you think I stated.

Now of course if you have proof that Dr. weng, Ms Thida or any other ranking figure in the UDD suggested the NRC committee on education should have a look at their curriculum for 'democracy for red-shirt adults' please share with us. I for one am ready to denounce the NRC committee for such deed.

Ah, "it would seem"! You can post anything you want with an "it would seem" post, and then challenge others to prove you wrong.

Have fun with that, most of us will ignore it, and resist the temptation to post "it would seem" thoughts about you. Though it would seem you are an apologetic, rationalizing lapdog to an illegal, undemocratic, rule-by-decree.....No, no, I won't go there.

Opinion is all about 'it would seem'. Of course if you think I should ignore opinions ...

BTW I don't challenge on my 'it would seem', I just point out that the interpretation of my opinion is incorrect. Furthermore you ask me how come I 'seem' to know what the UDD thinks and upon pointing out the OP as source, I just ask if you know more than that as you challenge me.

All in good (non alcoholic) spirits, in the privacy of my room, happily waving a hand with one of the digits stretched. May I challenge you to guess which one, my dear non-apologetic, non-rational believer in and of all that is not related to your version of democracy. At least that 'seems' to be your attitude.

"Furthermore you ask me how come I 'seem' to know what the UDD thinks and upon pointing out the OP as source, I just ask if you know more than that as you challenge me."

Where in the OP did a redshirt say "if not my way then now way"? Where did they say they were indifferent?

I read the post and get the impression that the people interviewed are unhappy about the coup, distrustful of the junta, have no confidence in the processes that are supposed to create 'real democracy', and have no desire to participate in what they see as a charade. You read the OP and conclude that since the redshirts aren't working with the junta they are indifferent to Thailand's future. I think my interpretation is the more reasonable one, while yours is more an attempt at mind-reading.

[heybruce]

To heck with the topic, let's talk about the amnesty attempt. That's what rubl wants to discuss.

That a lie, or being friendly not the truth.

You and tbthailand keep bringing up the 'blanket amnesty bill' as dropped or dead and I feel obliged to help you know the truth about the status of the blanket amnesty bill.

With so many bills on amnesty given to parliament for deliberation, maybe I should even be more clear in which I mean. On the other hand only one amnesty bill was a real blanket amnesty bill with the Yingluck government pushing it through parliament to only see it rejected by the Senate as the anti-government protesters didn't want to go home and gave the wrong impression to the Senate. Almost like there might have been a little bit of opposition.

You call it a lie then prove me right. Has anyone brought up the amnesty bill on this topic other than you? Does the fact that you've been challenged on the amnesty bill on other threads have anything to do with this thread?

Focus ruble, focus. The title of this topic is:

"Red shirts shrug off NRC moves, 'to watch process'"

Many 'red shirts' don't wish to participate in the military junta that followed the coup that toppled a democratically elected government they supported. Any on-topic comments that don't involve the amnesty bill?

Interestingly the OP does only mention "key red-shirts", like Dr. weng and Jatuporn.

"Red-shirt United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) co-leader Weng Tojirakarn said the whole process was under the junta's dictates, so it was pointless."

"Red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan said he was not surprised that neither red-shirt supporters nor members of Pheu Thai Party were appointed NRC members because his group had refused to join in the first place."

Somehow that gives the democratic impression that the red-shirt leadership has told their flock to sit tight and don't move. Probably because they should wait till the NCPO/NLA steps down before starting their games again?

How does an individual get a "democratic impression"? Do you take a vote among brain cells?

t

Other than that, I read your reply and think 'so what?'. The redshirt leaders probably have been urging their members not to do anything futile, so what? Many people are waiting for the NCPO/NLA to step down or stay in place with a new name, so what? I'm sure the redshirt leadership hopes to play the game of winning the next election, assuming there will be some semblance of a fair election, so what?

[rubl]

Opinion is all about 'it would seem'. Of course if you think I should ignore opinions ...

BTW I don't challenge on my 'it would seem', I just point out that the interpretation of my opinion is incorrect. Furthermore you ask me how come I 'seem' to know what the UDD thinks and upon pointing out the OP as source, I just ask if you know more than that as you challenge me.

All in good (non alcoholic) spirits, in the privacy of my room, happily waving a hand with one of the digits stretched. May I challenge you to guess which one, my dear non-apologetic, non-rational believer in and of all that is not related to your version of democracy. At least that 'seems' to be your attitude.

"Furthermore you ask me how come I 'seem' to know what the UDD thinks and upon pointing out the OP as source, I just ask if you know more than that as you challenge me."

Where in the OP did a redshirt say "if not my way then now way"? Where did they say they were indifferent?

I read the post and get the impression that the people interviewed are unhappy about the coup, distrustful of the junta, have no confidence in the processes that are supposed to create 'real democracy', and have no desire to participate in what they see as a charade. You read the OP and conclude that since the redshirts aren't working with the junta they are indifferent to Thailand's future. I think my interpretation is the more reasonable one, while yours is more an attempt at mind-reading.

Pray tell, where in the OP are 'the people' being interviewed?

It would seem we have "key red shirts", "UDD co-leader Dr. weng", "UDD leader Jatuporn", "red-shirt historian Suthachai Yimprasert" and "red-shirt supported Ekachai Chainubati".

Somehow 'the people' seem to be missing. Maybe that's because they know when they are supposed to let their leaders talk? Democratically of course.

[heybruce]

The PTP, the party that won the election in 2011, was still governing the nation when the coup was staged. You can split hairs as to whether this qualified as an elected government at the time, but the point is that the redshirts saw their party removed from government by the coup and now clearly don't want to have anything to do with the junta.

Regarding your Thaksin news article; I don't know how many people still pay attention to him, and neither do you. However that article would seem to give his blessings to redshirt participation on the NRC.

Finally, on the subject of reforms in general, and education reforms in particular, the NCPO will decide which reforms will be enacted, and Prayuth seems to have a less than liberal attitude towards education: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/03/junta-suppression-academic-talk-democracy-exposes-cracks-in-thailand-peaceful/

Actually if someone was 'governing' it would have been the 'unclear status' decimated cabinet and not the Pheu Thai party, or any other party in the nominally coalition government before the House was dissolved.

As for Thaksin, completely agree. Even Jatuporn now talks for Pheu Thai according to the OP.

BTW you used 'seems' in your last sentence. Didn't you just tell my I should not do that ?

You can also split hairs regarding what government was toppled by the coup, but the fact remains that the PTP, the party that won the 2011 election, was the party of the PM at the time and the party officially in charge.

I don't engage in wild speculation when I use the word 'seems', I apply a reasonable interpretation of available evidence. For example, from the above reference about the junta shutting down a seminar on democracy at Thammasat University:

The coup leader, Prayuth Chan-ocha, has been unapologetic. He views criticism of the junta as divisive and unhelpful. He said any group that wants to hold such seminars must get approval first, so the content can be screened — because "if it's about democracy or elections, or how the government is today, this they can't discuss."

So, as I wrote earlier, it would seem that Prayuth has a less than liberal attitude towards education. Do you disagree?

[rubl]

Interestingly the OP does only mention "key red-shirts", like Dr. weng and Jatuporn.

"Red-shirt United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD) co-leader Weng Tojirakarn said the whole process was under the junta's dictates, so it was pointless."

"Red-shirt leader Jatuporn Promphan said he was not surprised that neither red-shirt supporters nor members of Pheu Thai Party were appointed NRC members because his group had refused to join in the first place."

Somehow that gives the democratic impression that the red-shirt leadership has told their flock to sit tight and don't move. Probably because they should wait till the NCPO/NLA steps down before starting their games again?

How does an individual get a "democratic impression"? Do you take a vote among brain cells?

t

Other than that, I read your reply and think 'so what?'. The redshirt leaders probably have been urging their members not to do anything futile, so what? Many people are waiting for the NCPO/NLA to step down or stay in place with a new name, so what? I'm sure the redshirt leadership hopes to play the game of winning the next election, assuming there will be some semblance of a fair election, so what?

Did you really just write in a reply to me " I think my interpretation is the more reasonable one"

Anyway, so what, you like democracy your style to be told to people. That's fine.

The red-shirt leaders probably didn't urge their members, and certainly not in the same way as last time when we had all those cowardly night attack on anti-government supporters.

BTW I didn't know democracy, elections and 'winning' was part of a game, only part of the UDD leaders helping that single person who seems more important than all other Thai put together.

[rubl]

The PTP, the party that won the election in 2011, was still governing the nation when the coup was staged. You can split hairs as to whether this qualified as an elected government at the time, but the point is that the redshirts saw their party removed from government by the coup and now clearly don't want to have anything to do with the junta.

Regarding your Thaksin news article; I don't know how many people still pay attention to him, and neither do you. However that article would seem to give his blessings to redshirt participation on the NRC.

Finally, on the subject of reforms in general, and education reforms in particular, the NCPO will decide which reforms will be enacted, and Prayuth seems to have a less than liberal attitude towards education: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/10/03/junta-suppression-academic-talk-democracy-exposes-cracks-in-thailand-peaceful/

Actually if someone was 'governing' it would have been the 'unclear status' decimated cabinet and not the Pheu Thai party, or any other party in the nominally coalition government before the House was dissolved.

As for Thaksin, completely agree. Even Jatuporn now talks for Pheu Thai according to the OP.

BTW you used 'seems' in your last sentence. Didn't you just tell my I should not do that ?

You can also split hairs regarding what government was toppled by the coup, but the fact remains that the PTP, the party that won the 2011 election, was the party of the PM at the time and the party officially in charge.

I don't engage in wild speculation when I use the word 'seems', I apply a reasonable interpretation of available evidence. For example, from the above reference about the junta shutting down a seminar on democracy at Thammasat University:

The coup leader, Prayuth Chan-ocha, has been unapologetic. He views criticism of the junta as divisive and unhelpful. He said any group that wants to hold such seminars must get approval first, so the content can be screened — because "if it's about democracy or elections, or how the government is today, this they can't discuss."

So, as I wrote earlier, it would seem that Prayuth has a less than liberal attitude towards education. Do you disagree?

Oh boy, talk about splitting hairs when simply stating "Pheu Thai officially in charge". Next you'll explain to me that in all democracies you know of and approve a party is officially in charge and governing'. and that's even independent of regarding a status as the PM having dissolved the House, the 'unclear status cabinet in decimated form', 'protesting of we cannot step down by law' and even the 'very unclear status' MoFA suggestion the Military declare Martial Law so he can have an election are requested by that criminal fugitive.

As for education, move to the topic on 'lessons on democracy'. With you seeing no problem in a MoE quoting a criminal fugitive philosophically to base his education policy on, that seems more appropriate.

PS no offence, but after needing a day to clear my backlog of replies not seen yet, I need a break. Maybe Monday I'll feel up to it again. Democratically that is.

Cheers,

uncle rubl